Would you ping him for not releasing the ball?

[Agustin]

I'm interested to get your thoughts on this tackle. About 6 seconds into this video, white #7 gets tackled and blue #2 attempts to get the ball.

Would you ping white #7 for not releasing the ball or do you think he takes an appropriate amount of time to play the ball?

My own thoughts are that he knew he was isolated and went a very roundabout way to play the ball. In the heat of the match I probably would have penalised him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysmphxtBLLA

 

[stuart3826]

My instinct was to play on. Had the next white player not arrived to form a ruck thingy, things may have been different, but it looks close enough to immediate as it appears here

 

[andyscott]

Looks fine to me, play on.

 

[Simon Thomas]

For TV rugby acceptable and play on. Blue 2 was cleared pretty quickly so no denial of contest occurred.

Also we have no idea what standards were set in first 10-15 mins.

In a level 5 / 6 referee promotion assessment match, I suspect he / she would be tempted to ping the early ones like this to set the standard release time expected.

 

[Dickie E]

I'm OK with that.

I've got a problem with the entry of white #15 at game time 35:52 though

 

[DrSTU]

definitely play on for me.

 

[tim White]

You will note blue 2 was resting on top of the ball carrier whilst trying to rip the ball. I suspect he was not penalised because he got cleared out and became 'not material'. As the tackler can do nothing until he gets to his feet you cannot penalise the ball carrier for holding on in this case.

 

[ddjamo]

another 1/2 second and I would have been all over it. I don't care for squeeze ball at our/my levels and if support wasn't there immediately - PK. I know it happened fast - but his rolling and squeeze ball is what maintained possession...7 ran isolated...run isolated and you lose the ball one way or another IMO.

 

[ckuxmann]

play on but at about :27 maybe coming in from the side

 

[Davet]

Play on here, and Blue 2 was off his feet anyway.

I will say the timing was on the margin of acceptable, and if Blue 2 had been properly on his feet White 7 could well have been pinged.

 

[Agustin]

another 1/2 second and I would have been all over it. I don't care for squeeze ball at our/my levels and if support wasn't there immediately - PK. I know it happened fast - but his rolling and squeeze ball is what maintained possession...7 ran isolated...run isolated and you lose the ball one way or another IMO.

That's what I figure as well. In the heat of the match (and especially early on in a match to set standards) I would have penalised. Having watched it on video a few times, I am thinking more along the same lines as you... just 1/2 second longer.

I also tend to have little patience for rolling & squeeze ball, especially when the runner is isolated.

However it seems quite a few people didn't see a reason to penalise (fair enough), which fits with the impression I have that I'm generally quicker than most to whistle for not releasing the ball....

I've got a problem with the entry of white #15 at game time 35:52 though

What time is that in the video?

 

[Ian_Cook]

I'm interested to get your thoughts on this tackle. About 6 seconds into this video, white #7 gets tackled and blue #2 attempts to get the ball.

Would you ping white #7 for not releasing the ball or do you think he takes an appropriate amount of time to play the ball?

My own thoughts are that he knew he was isolated and went a very roundabout way to play the ball. In the heat of the match I probably would have penalised him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysmphxtBLLA

White 7 takes two seconds from the moment he hits the ground until the moment the ball is available. I have no problem with the time taken, but what I DO have is problem with is that he rolled over in top of the ball before he released it.

Law 15 says you must place, pass, push or release the ball, and you must do so immediately. In rolling over on top of the ball, he is blocking his opponent's access to the ball, illegally IMO.

I see other poster's saying Blue 2 wasn't on his feet. Not true.

In all three frames, White 7 is tackled, Blue 2 is on his feet and is fetching the ball, but White 7 rolls over with the ball. He should have released at that point, and didn't, so "peep".

15.5 THE TACKLED PLAYER
(e) If opposition players who are on their feet attempt to play the ball, the tackled player must release the ball.

Then he rolls over on top of the ball

15.5 THE TACKLED PLAYER
(a) A tackled player must not lie on, over, or near the ball to prevent opponents from gaining possession of it, and must try to make the ball available immediately so that play can continue.

I would ping him, and I could choose either Law as justification.

 

[OB..]

I see other poster's saying Blue 2 wasn't on his feet. Not true.

But neither does he go to ground, so he is not a tackler.

 

[Taff]

But neither does he go to ground, so he is not a tackler.

So he can quite legally go for the ball surely? Unless I'm missing something again.

 

[OB..]

There is a tackle, but he is not the tackler, so he must come in through the gate. He doesn't IMHO since White 7 drives past him.

 

[Ian_Cook]

There is a tackle, but he is not the tackler, so he must come in through the gate. He doesn't IMHO since White 7 drives past him.

I completely disagree.

Firstly, I could make a very good argument that he was a tackler, along with Blue 1. That he "drove past" Blue 2 is irrelevant. He initially "drove past" Blue 1 as well, but Blue 1 is still a tackler!!

Secondly, even in the unlikely case that you could argue he is not a tackler, he is most certainly standing in the "gate"

LAW 15.6 OTHER PLAYERS
(d) At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players (Blue 2) who play the ball must do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player (White 7) or the tackler (Blue 2) closest to those players’ goal line.

If you argue that Blue 2 is a tackler, then he is entitled to go for the ball

If you argue that Blue 2 is not a tackler, then Blue 1 is the only tackler, ergo, he is the tackler "closest to those players’ goal line" and since Blue 2 is directly between Blue 1 and his own goal-line, he is standing in the gate, ergo he has the right to get the ball.

Whichever way you slice it, Blue 2 is on his feet and is therefore king and has all the rights. White 7 denied him the ball by rolling over on top of it...... PEEP!!!

 

[Dixie]

I see other poster's saying Blue 2 wasn't on his feet. Not true.

In all three frames, White 7 is tackled, Blue 2 is on his feet and is fetching the ball, but White 7 rolls over with the ball. He should have released at that point, and didn't, so "peep".

I completely disagree [with OB's assertion that Blue 2 is not a "tackler"].

Firstly, I could make a very good argument that he was a tackler, along with Blue 1.

Ian, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. On the one hand, you are adamant (and provide conclusive photographic evidence to demonstrate) that Blue 2 remains on his feet throughout. You then claim that he's a tackler - the definition of which requires that he has gone to ground

Secondly, even in the unlikely case that you could argue he is not a tackler, he is most certainly standing in the "gate"...
If you argue that Blue 2 is not a tackler, then Blue 1 is the only tackler, ergo, he is the tackler "closest to those players’ goal line" and since Blue 2 is directly between Blue 1 and his own goal-line, he is standing in the gate, ergo he has the right to get the ball.

Whichever way you slice it, Blue 2 is on his feet and is therefore king and has all the rights. White 7 denied him the ball by rolling over on top of it...... PEEP!!!

Agree.

 

[OB..]

That reading of 15.6 (d) is one I had never even thought of before. I simply do not believe that entering the tackle area is fine provided any tacklers are ahead of you. Whichever of the players is closest to the goal line determines the edge of the tackle zone.

You are construing the law like this:
At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the
ball and from directly behind (the tackled player) or (the tackler closest to those players’ goal
line).
This would mean the tackle zone limit runs though Blue 1's finger tips, which is flatly contrary to everything I have been taught about tackle zones.

I understand the law to be construed as follows:-
At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the
ball and from directly behind (the tackled player or the tackler) closest to those players’ goal
line.

 

[Agustin]

That reading of 15.6 (d) is one I had never even thought of before. I simply do not believe that entering the tackle area is fine provided any tacklers are ahead of you. Whichever of the players is closest to the goal line determines the edge of the tackle zone.

You are construing the law like this:
At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the
ball and from directly behind (the tackled player) or (the tackler closest to those players’ goal
line).
This would mean the tackle zone limit runs though Blue 1's finger tips, which is flatly contrary to everything I have been taught about tackle zones.

I understand the law to be construed as follows:-
At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the
ball and from directly behind (the tackled player or the tackler) closest to those players’ goal
line.

OB.., I agree with your interpretation of the description of the gate, but I do think that Blue #2 entered the tackle through the gate.

In the attached picture I think we see the tackle in progress, and Blue #2 is between his own goal line and the tackle (consisting of both the tackled player and the tackler) as he enters the tackle area.

(Sorry I do not know how to place inline images as Ian has done.)

 

[OB..]

Agustin - a still photo can be misleading, and in yours the tackle has not yet taken place, since White 7 is not on the ground. If Blue 2 is inside the tackle zone when the tackle is complete, but is not a tackler, then he has to release, leave the tackle zone, and then re-enter. You can only stay in the tackle zone if you are a tackler (or the tackled player).

If a non-tackler is just outside the tackle zone when he brings a player to the ground, he still has to release (and so does a tackler), and I don't see Blue 2 doing that.

However on the facts I would let play go on because I think it was all essentially immaterial.